ArticleThe Journal of manual & manipulative therapy2013
Joint mobilization forces and therapist reliability in subjects with knee osteoarthritis.
Article in The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effect of real-time feedback on learning lumbar spine joint mobilization by entry-level doctor of physical therapy students: a randomized, controlled, crossover trial.The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy · 2020Trial
- Effect of joint mobilization techniques for primary total knee arthroplasty: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.Medicine · 2017Trial
- Effects of manually applied force control training in physiotherapy students and experienced manual therapists.The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy · 2026Article
- Effects of nocturnal melatonin-based tissue-bone homeostasis manipulation at varying time points on pain and central mechanisms in individuals with knee osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Defining Skill in Manual and Manipulative Therapy: Perspectives from Physical Therapists.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Reliability and accuracy of an expert physical therapist as a reference standard for a manual therapy joint mobilization trial.The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy · 2021Article
- The intra-rater reliability of a revised 3-point grading system for accessory joint mobilizations.The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy · 2017Article
- Establishing the Basis for Mechanobiology-Based Physical Therapy Protocols to Potentiate Cellular Healing and Tissue Regeneration.Frontiers in physiology · 2017Review
- Unilateral anterior crossbite induces aberrant mineral deposition in degenerative temporomandibular cartilage in rats.Osteoarthritis and cartilage · 2016Article
- Quantifying performance metrics of cervical spine mobilization for improved education and clinical outcomes: Early experience with a novel wearable device.Journal of rehabilitation and assistive technologies engineeringArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study determined biomechanical force parameters and reliability among clinicians performing knee joint mobilizations.
methodsSixteen subjects with knee osteoarthritis and six therapists participated in the study. Forces were recorded using a capacitive-based pressure mat for three techniques at two grades of mobilization, each with two trials of 15 seconds. Dosage (force-time integral), amplitude, and frequency were also calculated. Analysis of variance was used to analyze grade differences, intraclass correlation coefficients determined reliability, and correlations assessed force associations with subject and rater variables.
resultsGrade IV mobilizations produced higher mean forces (P<0.001) and higher dosage (P<0.001), while grade III produced higher maximum forces (P = 0.001). Grade III forces (Newtons) by technique (mean, maximum) were: extension 48, 81; flexion 41, 68; and medial glide 21, 34. Grade IV forces (Newtons) by technique (mean, maximum) were: extension 58, 78; flexion 44, 60; and medial glide 22, 30. Frequency (Hertz) ranged between 0.9-1.1 (grade III) and 1.4-1.6 (grade IV). Intra-clinician reliability was excellent (>0.90). Inter-clinician reliability was moderate for force and dosage, and poor for amplitude and frequency. DISCUSSION: Force measurements were consistent with previously reported ranges and clinical constructs. Grade III and grade IV mobilizations can be distinguished from each other with differences for force and frequency being small, and dosage and amplitude being large. Intra-clinician reliability was excellent for all biomechanical parameters and inter-clinician reliability for dosage, the main variable of clinical interest, was moderate. This study quantified the applied forces among multiple clinicians, which may help determine optimal dosage and standardize care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.